GamingPickz
Game vs game · side by side

EverQuest II vs STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)

EverQuest II is a mmorpg open-world game from Darkpaw Games (2011) while STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) is an FPS strategy game from Pandemic Studios (2009).

Quick answer: STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) rates higher, 8.1 to 7.0 on the GamingPickz Score, and EverQuest II is the cheaper at Free.

EverQuest II

2011 · Darkpaw Games

7.0GamingPickz Score

Free

Steam: Mostly Positive

STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)

2009 · Pandemic Studios

8.1GamingPickz Score

$9.99

Steam: Overwhelmingly Positive

What each one is

EverQuest II is filed under Mmorpg and Open-World. In contrast, STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) under FPS and Strategy.

EverQuest II

EverQuest® II is a deep fantasy MMORPG with over two decades of content, a thriving world, and ongoing expansions that keep Norrath growing. Create your hero and adventure through a massively rich, ever-evolving universe.

Description from its Steam store page

STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)

Join the rise of Darth Vader’s elite 501st Legion of Stormtroopers as you fight through an all new story-based saga where every action you take impacts the battlefront and, ultimately, the fate of the Star Wars galaxy.

Description from its Steam store page

Story, characters and reception

EverQuest II
Reception

Reception EverQuest II had mostly positive reception from critics, earning an 83 out of 100 average score from aggregate review website Metacritic . Many reviewers compared the title to the original EverQuest , which was viewed as one of the best and most influential examples of the genre. Greg Kasavin of GameSpot said that EverQuest II isn't the massive step for the genre that its predecessor was, but it can still be a fun and addictive online… (Wikipedia)

STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)

No Wikipedia detail on file.

At a glance

EverQuest IISTAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)
GamingPickz Score7.0/108.1/10
Steam ratingMostly Positive (79%, 2,934)Overwhelmingly Positive (95%, 54,262)
Critic aggregate83/10078/100
PriceFree$9.99
Install size
Steam Deckplayableplayable
Released20112009
DeveloperDarkpaw GamesPandemic Studios

Prices and Steam ratings are read live and move over time.

EverQuest II vs STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005), point by point

Each facet side by side. A round is marked won only where a figure settles it; feel and "which is better" carry no mark, because no number we hold decides them.

  1. Genre and premise

    EverQuest IIMmorpg open-world game
    STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)FPS strategy game

    What each is filed as. Each game describes itself in full above; we do not judge a premise.

  2. How it plays

    EverQuest IIFree to Play, RPG, Massively Multiplayer
    STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)Action, Shooter, Classic

    The tags players apply most, in order of votes. A read on feel, not a verdict.

  3. Reception

    EverQuest IIScore 7.0 · 79% on Steam · 83 critic
    STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)Score 8.1 · 95% on Steam · 78 critic

    The GamingPickz Score is a composite of player sentiment, critics and popularity, computed the same way for every game.

  4. Content and scale

    EverQuest II2,934 reviews · 3 add-ons
    STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)54,262 reviews

    Reach and footprint, not quality: more reviews or a bigger install is not a better game.

  5. Price

    EverQuest IIFree
    STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)$9.99

    Read live from Steam and subject to change.

  6. On a Steam Deck

    EverQuest IIPlayable
    STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)Playable

    Valve's own Deck compatibility rating.

Across the rounds a number can settle, it is level at 1 each. Which one is "better" is the part no figure decides, so we leave it to what you want from the two.

The two on the grid

Compare the whole catalogue

EverQuest II and STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) on the axes the GamingPickz Score is built from, on the full 0 to 100 scale so each dot is its real position. Change either axis to compare them on any measure.

2 games have both

01000100PlayersPopularity

Players. The share of Steam reviews marked positive, pulled toward the catalogue average in proportion to how few reviews stand behind it. A game with 200 reviews moves a long way toward the average; one with 200,000 barely moves at all. Without this a title sitting at 100 percent on nine reviews outranks Half-Life 2 at 98 percent on 278,000.

Popularity. A blend of two things that are not the same. Audience is how many people wrote a Steam review, which is a floor on how many played it. Reach is how many language editions of Wikipedia document the game, which is cultural footprint rather than sales. A game can score high on one and low on the other: a huge free-to-play title has audience without reach, and a landmark console exclusive has reach without a Steam audience at all. Where both exist they are averaged; where only one does, that one carries it.

  • PC

Every point links to that game's entry. The value map and the reception map are fixed views of the same data.

See the whole grid

How positions are decided

No paid placement, no favouritism, live third-party data
  • Placed by the published method, not by us. Every coordinate is computed from the axis definitions and weights printed on this site. Nobody moves a point. See the axes.
  • Nothing here is paid for. No sponsored placements, no promoted slots, no arrangement of any kind affects a position. If that ever changes it will be labelled and sit outside the ranking.
  • No favouritism, including our own. The 16 games we have written full reviews of are scored by exactly the same formula as the other 1,510, from the same third-party inputs, and they land where it puts them. Our own opinion of a game does not enter its coordinates.
  • A position is not an endorsement. It says how a game was received and what it costs, not that we recommend it. Where we do recommend something, it carries a written review with a name on it.
  • Fetched from live third-party data. Player sentiment from Steam, critic aggregates as published on store pages, prices checked hourly, attention from Wikipedia. Each figure carries its source and the date it was read, and we do not adjust any of them.

Which to pick, by what you want

  • The higher-rated of the two: STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) (GamingPickz Score 8.1)
  • The cheaper right now: EverQuest II (Free)
  • The safer bet by weight of reviews: STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) (54,262 reviews)

What they have in common

Both are tagged by Steam players with:

AdventureMultiplayerActionSingleplayerClassicThird PersonFirst-Person

Where they differ

EverQuest II is also

Free to PlayRPGMassively MultiplayerMMORPGFantasyCrafting

STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) is also

ShooterThird-Person ShooterSci-fiSpaceFPSModdable

Tags players apply to one game and not the other.

Difficulty and who each is for

By the tags players apply, EverQuest II is middle-of-the-road on difficulty. STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) is middle-of-the-road on difficulty.

System requirements, side by side

EverQuest IISTAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)
Minimum GPU64MB 3d Graphics card with Vertex Shader and Pixel Shader (VS/PS) Capability
Minimum CPUIntel Pentium 4 1.5 GHz
Minimum RAM0.3 GB
Install size

Can your PC run them? Check each against your own kit: EverQuest II · STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005).

Accessibility features

Steam store pages declare 0 accessibility features for EverQuest II and 0 for STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005). A declaration is a floor, not a review.

If you like one, also try

Common questions

How different are EverQuest II and STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) in scope?

EverQuest II has drawn 2,934 Steam reviews and ships 3 add-ons. STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) has drawn 54,262 Steam reviews.

Is EverQuest II or STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) better?

By the GamingPickz Score, STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) rates higher (8.1 to 7.0). That is a composite of player sentiment, the critic aggregate and popularity, not our taste. "Better" also depends on price, length and platform, which the table above lays out.

Which is cheaper, EverQuest II or STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)?

EverQuest II is cheaper right now at Free, against $9.99. Prices move, so this is read live from Steam and can change.

Should I get EverQuest II or STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)?

STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) rates higher, 8.1 to 7.0 on the GamingPickz Score, and EverQuest II is the cheaper at Free. It also depends on what you want: the "which to pick" section above calls out which is cheaper, lighter on storage, better on a Steam Deck and the safer bet by weight of reviews.

Do you rank one above the other for a fee?

No. Neither game, nor anyone else, pays for placement or a verdict here. The order and every figure come out of the same public data the rest of the site uses.

How we compare, and what we will not do

The GamingPickz Score is a composite of player sentiment (adjusted for sample size), the critic aggregate and popularity, computed by the same code every ranked list on this site uses. The Steam rating label is Valve's own, reconstructed from the positive percentage and review count. Prices are read live. We do not write an opinion of which game is "better": we report the numbers and say which wins each measurable question above.

More on each